1 / 36

What is the     P form factor?

Transition form factors and two-photon physics from BaBar Alexander Botov BINP, Novosibirsk, Russia PHIPSI11. What is the     P form factor?. The amplitude of the     P transition (P is a pseudoscalar meson) contains one unknown function, depending on the photon virtualities.

sahkyo
Download Presentation

What is the     P form factor?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Transition form factors and two-photon physics from BaBarAlexander BotovBINP, Novosibirsk, RussiaPHIPSI11

  2. What is the    Pform factor? The amplitude of the    P transition (P is a pseudoscalar meson) contains one unknown function, depending on the photon virtualities. The form factor is usually measured as a function of Q2=|q1|2. The second photon is real or almost real (q220). The form factor is known only for the two extreme cases. For 0 from the axial anomaly in the chiral limit, prediction for (0) from perturbative QCD f  0.131 GeV is the pion decay constant A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  3. Why is the form factor interesting? Hard scattering amplitude for qq transition which is calculable in pQCD Nonperturbative meson distribution amplitude (DA) describing transition P  qq x is the fraction of the meson momentum carried by one of the quarks • The meson DA (x,Q2) plays an important role in theoretical descriptions of many QCD processes ( +-, , c,0,1+-, Bl, B… ). • Its shape (x dependence) is unknown, but its evolution with Q2 is predicted by pQCD. • The models for DA shape can be tested using data on the form factor Q2 dependence. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  4. Calculation of the     0form factor The leading contribution: G.P.Lepage and S.J.Brodsky, Phys.Lett. B87, 359 (1979) A.P.Bakulev, S.V.Mikhailov and N.G.Stefanis, Phys.Rev. D 67, 074012 (2003): light-cone sum rule method at NLO. • NLO and power corrections are large: 30, 20,10 % at 4,10,50 GeV2. • Power corrections are 7% at 10 GeV2 (twist-4 + due to hadronic component of a quasi-real photon). • What is the model uncertainty of the power corrections? A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  5. Calculation of the     0 form factor CZ DA: V.L.Chernyak and A.R.Zhitnitsky, Nucl.Phys. B201, 492 (1982). BMS DA: A.P.Bakulev, S.V.Mikhailov and N.G.Stefanis, Phys.Lett. B508, 279 (2001). BMS AS CZ Q2=1.35 GeV2 • TheQCD evolution of the DA is very slow. The Q2 needed to decrease the a2 coefficient found at 1 GeV2 by a factor of 3 is about 70000 GeV2. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  6. How can the form factor be measured? • Two-photon production of the meson • -S+M2 < q12 < 0, q22  0, Q2 -q12 • d/dQ2 falls as 1/Q6 • At s=10.6 GeV for e+e- e+e-0d/dQ2(10 GeV2)  10 fb/GeV2 • Annihilation process e+e- P • Q2 = S > M2 •   1/S2 • (e+e- )  5 fb at s=10.6 GeV • Dalitz decay P   e+e- • 0 < Q2 < M2 • M2d/dQ2(2/)(P) at Q2/M2  ¼ A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  7. Available statistics • The cross section studied is < 10 fb (1038 cm2) • B-factory at SLAC and BABAR detector • peak luminosity is about 1034 cm-2sec-1 • integrated luminosity collected during 8-yeardata taking period is about 450 fb-1 • dN/dQ2 falls with Q2 increase as Q6 • Previous CLEO measurement of the   0, ,  transition form factorswas based on 3 fb-1(J.Gronberg et al., Phys.Rev. D57, 33 (1998)) A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  8. BABAR detector 1.5 T Solenoid Electromagnetic Calorimeter (EMC) Detector of Internally Recflected Cherenkov Light (DIRC) e+ (3.1 GeV) Drift Chamber (DCH) e- (9 GeV) Instrumented Flux Return (IFR) Silicon Vertex Tracker (SVT) A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  9. Two-photon reaction e+e- e+e- P • Electrons are scattered predominantly at small angles. • Single-tag mode: • one of electrons is detected • Q2=-q12=2EE(1-cos ), • q22  0 • F(Q2,0) P • electron is detected and identified • meson P is detected and fully reconstructed • electron + meson system has low p • missing mass in an event is close to zero P P Untagged e pT0 Along beam axis Tagged e e A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  10. Trigger selection for e+e- e+e- 0 • The e+e- e+e- 0 events do not pass the standard BABAR trigger and background filters. • Fortunately, a special trigger line (electron+photon with zero recoil mass)was designed to select Virtual Compton scattering (VCS) events for detector calibration. e+e-  e+e-0 VCS • Two photons from the 0decay are close and usually form single cluster (with two bumps) in the detector calorimeter. • The VCS trigger treats this cluster as a photon. • The e+e-  e+e-0 events are efficiently selected by the VCS trigger. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  11. Selection criteria • VCS trigger • Identified electron, Ee > 2 GeV • 0 formed from two photons, E > 1.5 GeV • Cuts to remove QED background (|cos | <0.8, |cos h|<0.8, no extra tracks along 0 direction, …) • Momentum of e0 system is directed along beam axis: |cos e| > 0.99. This cut limits the q2 range for untagged electron (|q2| < 0.2 GeV2). This cut improves Q2 resolution removing events with ISR photons where data nonpeaking background A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  12. Detection efficiency from MC • Due to asymmetry of e+e- collision the Q2 region below 7 GeV2 is measured only with positron tag • We measure the cross section from Q2 > 4 GeV2 to avoid possible systematic error due to data-MC difference near the edges of the detector • The average 0 energy grows with Q2. This leads to decrease of the detection efficiency for Q2 > 10 GeV2 A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  13. Two-photon mass spectrum B.Aubert et al., Phys. Rev. D80, 052002 (2009) The two-photon invariant mass spectrum for data events with Q2 = 4-40 GeV2 fitted with a sum of signal (obtained using MC simulation) and background (a second order polynomial) distributions. N 14000  140 A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  14. Efficiency corrections The transition form factor is determined from the ratio of Q2 distributions for data and simulation events. The data distribution must be corrected to account for data-MC simulation difference in detector response: • We study the data-MC difference in: • 0 reconstruction efficiency • PID efficiency • trigger inefficiency • effect of selection cuts on r and cos e • The corrections are determined using specially selected samples of e+e-    +-0 and VCS events. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  15. Total correction for data-MC difference • Total systematic error (which is independent on Q2) is 2.5% and includes: • 1% - 0 losses • 2% - trigger efficiency • 1% - cos e cut A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  16. e+e- e+e- 0, cross section B.Aubert et al., Phys. Rev. D80, 052002 (2009) Systematic uncertainty independent on Q2 is 3%. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  17. e+e- e+e- 0, form factor B.Aubert et al., Phys. Rev. D80, 052002 (2009) • In Q2 range 4-9 GeV2 our results are in a reasonable agreement with CLEO data but have significantly better accuracy. • At Q2>10 GeV2 the measured form factor exceeds the asymptotic limit 2f=0.185 GeV. Most models for the pion distribution amplitude give form factors approaching the limit from below. • Our data in the range 4-40 GeV2 are well described by the formula • with A=0.1820.002 GeV and =0.250.02, i.e. F~1/Q3/2. Our fit Asymptotic limit Systematic uncertainty independent on Q2 is 2.3%. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  18. e+e- e+e- 0, after publication S.V.Mikhailov, N.G.Stefanis, Nucl. Phys. B821, 291(2009); arXiv:0909.5128; arXiv:0910.3498. CZ BMS The NNLO pQCD corrections was partly taken into account (in contrast to the previous work showed on slide 5). They was estimated to be about 5% at Q210 GeV2. ASY The BABAR data contradict the QCD factorization for any pion DA with the end points (x=0,1) behavior  x(1-x). A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  19. e+e- e+e- 0, after publication A.E.Dorokhov, arXiv:0905.4577, 1003.4693. A.V. Radyuskin, arXiv:0906.0323. M.V.Polyakov, arXiv:0906.0538 … A flat pion distribution amplitude (x)  1 is used to reproduce Q2 dependence of BABAR data. To avoid divergence the infrared regulator m2 can be introduced The result has a logarithmic rise with the Q2 increase with m20.6 GeV2. A.E.Dorokhov arXiv:1003.4693 A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  20. e+e- e+e- 0, after publication V.L.Chernyak, arXiv:0912.0623 The twist-4 power correction, F/F(Q2)  -(0.6 GeV2)/Q2, is only part of the total power correction. Taking, for example, F/F(Q2)= -1.5/Q2-(1.2/Q2)2 for CZ DA leads to good data description. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  21. e+e- e+e- (), event selection P. del Amo Sanchez et al., Phys. Rev. D84, 052001 (2011)  +-0, 0 +-,  Ns=306070 Ns=501090 A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  22.  and  form factors The systematic uncertainties independent of Q2 are 2.9% for the  form factor and 3.5% for the  form factor. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  23.  and  form factors • CLEO (Phys. Rev. D79, 111101, 2009) and BABAR (Phys. Rev. D74, 012002, 2006) data on the time-like transition form factors are added. • They are extracted from the e+e-() cross section measurements at Q2=14.2 GeV2 (CLEO) and 112 GeV2 (BABAR). • At large Q2 the time- and space-like values are expected to be close. • This is confirmed by the CLEO result. • The BABAR time-like data allow to extend the Q2 region up to 112 GeV2 A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  24. Discussion:  and  form factors • The BABAR data are fit with Q2F(Q2)=b+a ln Q2 (GeV2) with 2/n=6.7/10 for  and 14.6/10 for  • The fitted rise (a0.2 GeV2) is about 3 times weaker than that for 0. • The fit by a constant for Q2>15 GeV2 also gives reasonable quality: 2/n=5.6/5 for  and2.6/5 for . A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  25. e+e-  e+e-c, form factor J.P.Lees et al., Phys. Rev. D 81 052010 (2010) • The form factor is normalized to F(0) obtained from no-tag data • The form factor data are fit with the monopole function • The result =8.50.60.7 GeV2 does not contradict to the vector dominance model with =m2J/=9.6 GeV2. • pQCD: Due to relatively large c-quark mass, the cform factor is rather insensitive to the shape of the c distribution amplitude.  is expected to be about 10 GeV2 (T. Feldmann, P.Kroll, Phys. Lett. B 413, 410 (1997)). • Lattice QCD: =8.40.4 GeV2 (J.J.Dudek, R.G.Edwards, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 172001 (2006)). LO pQCD monopole fit Systematic uncertainty independent of Q2 is 4.3%. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  26. Concluding remarks • After the CLEO publication on the photon-meson transition form factors in 1998 it was generally accepted that the pion DA is close to asymptotic form in near-end-point regions. Many theoretical works (predictions) using such near-asymptotic DAs were published. • The BABAR measurement indicates that the pion DA is significantly wider than the asymptotic form. If the experiment is correct, many theoretical predictions should be revised. • The next measurement of the pion-photon transition form factor confirming or refuting BABAR result will be performed at Super-B factories in 5-10 years. • Therefore, study of other reactions sensitive to the DA shape and careful theoretical analysis of already measured reactions should be performed. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  27. Summary • The 0, ,  transition form factors have been measured for Q2 range from 4 to 40 GeV2. • An unexpected Q2 dependence of the 0 form factor is observed. • The measured Q2 dependencies for the * and * transition form factors strongly differ from that for *0. • The  data are in good agreement with the result of QCD calculation with a conventional DA. • For  the agreement is worse. A mild logarithmic rise of Q2F(Q2) is not excluded. • There are many processes sensitive to the DA shape measured and not measured yet. The theoretical input is required to stimulate experimentalists. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  28. State-of-the-art calculations S.S. Agaev,N. Offen, F.A. Porkert, arXiv:1012.4671 A. Khodjamirian, arXiv:0909.2154 P. Kroll, work in progress H. Li, S. Mishima, arXiv:0907.0166 A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  29. Specific features of e+e- e+e- 0 • Low final particle multiplicity and only one charged particle (electron). • Such events are usually removed at the trigger and filter stages • Special trigger line should be designed to select e+ e-  e+ e- 0 events • Large QED background: • e+ e-  e+ e-  in which one of the photons is emitted along the beam axis, and one of the electrons is soft • Virtual Compton scattering (VCS): e+ e-  e+ e-  with one of the final electrons going along the collision axis • The photon from QED process together with a soft photon, for example, from beam background, may give the invariant mass close to the 0 mass. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  30. Two-photon mass spectrum The data were divided into 17 Q2 intervals. The size of the interval is increased with Q2 growth. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  31. Peaking background The main source of the peaking background is e+e- e+e- 0o. It is seen as 0 peak in the two-photon invariant mass spectrum for events with two extra photons. To estimate and subtract background we select a clear sample of 20 events with special criteria. The 20 background is found to be about 10% at Q2 < 10 GeV2 and 6-7% at higher Q2. A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  32. Two-photon background  • In contrast to previous CLEO analysis we observe the background from the two photon process e+e- e+e- o. • It is seen as a 0 peak in the two-photon invariant mass spectrum for events with 2 extra photons. • For the  sample the two-photon background does not exceed 1.6%. • For the  sample the background is estimated to be about 10%.  A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  33. - mixing in the quark flavor basis The form factors for the |n and |s states are introduced with asymptotic limits where decay constants is expected to be fn=f, fs=1.34f. One can expect that the DA for the |n state is close to the 0DA. Under this assumption the only difference between the |n and 0DAs is a factor of 3/5 coming from the quark charges.   41 A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  34. Form factor for |n and |s state • The Q2 dependencies of the measured |n and 0form factors are strongly different. • The data on the |n form factor are described well by the model with BMS DA. • For |s all data points lie well below the pQCD prediction for the asymptotic DA. • Is DA for |s narrower than the asymptotic DA? • The result for |s strongly depends on mixing parameters, for example, on a possible two-gluon contents in . A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  35. Concluding remarks • The processes with pseudoscalars, which have already been measured and which theoretical description should be updated: • The *() transition form factors. There are new BABAR data. • The pion and kaon electromagnetic form factors. There are recent CLEO time-like measurements at Q2=14 GeV2 • Belle measurements of the   , KK,  cross sections for W up to 4.1 GeV • c0,c2  , KK, , …(BELLE,CLEO,BES) • … A. Botov – PHIPSI11

  36. Concluding remarks • The processes sensitive to the pseudoscalar DA shape which can be measured using B-factory data • ,, • single tag studies of  reactions: +, , … • update of the e+e-() cross section measurements • kaon electromagnetic form factor at 112 GeV2 • e+e-VP • … A. Botov – PHIPSI11

More Related